Anti-Atheist Bigotry: Atheists Are As Distrusted As Rapists

[organofcorti]

Moloch is trying to make himself as a victim, although he attacks other type of people all the time.
Jesus loves you too Moloch, you can give up all that anger 

So if someone disagrees with you, it's attacking? What do you call it when you disagree with someone else?

[BARR_Official]

I always refer to Penn Jillette who says, "As an Atheist, I have raped and murdered exactly the number of people that I want to rape and murder... that number is zero"

You're saying it's okay to murder as many people as you want.

[organofcorti]

I always refer to Penn Jillette who says, "As an Atheist, I have raped and murdered exactly the number of people that I want to rape and murder... that number is zero"

You're saying it's okay to murder as many people as you want.

As long as that number is zero.

[BARR_Official]

I always refer to Penn Jillette who says, "As an Atheist, I have raped and murdered exactly the number of people that I want to rape and murder... that number is zero"

You're saying it's okay to murder as many people as you want.

As long as that number is zero.

No, that's not what he said.

He said the only reason he's never murdered anyone is because he's never felt like it.

The number is currently zero, but it could change to any number based on the same principles.

[organofcorti]

I always refer to Penn Jillette who says, "As an Atheist, I have raped and murdered exactly the number of people that I want to rape and murder... that number is zero"

You're saying it's okay to murder as many people as you want.

As long as that number is zero.

No, that's not what he said.

He said the only reason he's never murdered anyone is because he's never felt like it.

The number is currently zero, but it could change to any number based on the same principles.

I think you're talking out of your arse here.

[Moloch]

I always refer to Penn Jillette who says, "As an Atheist, I have raped and murdered exactly the number of people that I want to rape and murder... that number is zero"

You're saying it's okay to murder as many people as you want.

As long as that number is zero.

No, that's not what he said.

He said the only reason he's never murdered anyone is because he's never felt like it.

The number is currently zero, but it could change to any number based on the same principles.

I think you're talking out of your arse here.

Why not hear it from the man himself?

Penn Jillette on morality without God (90 seconds)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WwarX443Lk

[BARR_Official]

Why not hear it from the man himself?

Because I don't need some man to tell me what's right and what's wrong.

Especially not some ancient out-of-date sociopath from the 1960s, with a ponytail but without a conscience.

If his teachings are so good and true, why do people have such vastly different interpretations of the meaning?

According to his own words, the only difference between himself and a murderer is a mere difference in taste or personal preference.  He likes blue, murderers happen to like red instead.  He does whatever he wants to do, and so do murderers.  He's admitting that he lives by the same rules that murderers live by.

Murderers just have wrong thoughts, but he is pure and perfect.
That's why he's never murdered anyone - because he doesn't want to.
What if he did want to kill someone?
His solution for immoral behavior seems to be "never have any immoral desires". 
Since he can't back that up logically, you'll have to abbreviate it to "anything you want to do is good."

And for some reason you actually still follow and preach these long-abandoned ideas -
ideas that were only popular with narcissists and spoiled white kids 50 years ago in the tie-dye age,
with the highest concentration seen among homeless STD-ridden drug addicts.
Their ambition in life was to avoid work and avoid soap,
but some of them are still on TV being worshiped.  Sad.

[Moloch]

Why not hear it from the man himself?

Penn Jillette on morality without God (90 seconds)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WwarX443Lk

Because I don't need some man to tell me what's right and what's wrong.

Especially not some ancient out-of-date sociopath from the 1960s, with a ponytail but without a conscience.

I see... you only trust ancient out-of-date sociopaths from the stone-age?  Have you seen the length of Jesus' hair?  Talk about pony tail...

It's sad that you will sit here and argue without even bothering to listen to what an Atheist has to say...

What are you afraid of?  Penn Jillette doesn't bite (unless you ask nicely)

[BARR_Official]

I see... you only trust ancient out-of-date sociopaths from the stone-age?

Morality has to stay fashionable, like you said. 
If it's out-of-date, it's out-of-date.

People in the stone age are still unfashionably old, but they couldn't help it.
Hippies from the 1960s looked ridiculous and acted even worse.
So clearly they should also be mocked along with people from other past eras.

Like you said, if it's old it's not a good basis for morality.

It's sad that you will sit here and argue without even bothering to listen to what an Atheist has to say...

Are you playing the victim card like a feminist, or is it more of a martyred Christ complex? 
I disagreed with a statement on its own merit, don't make it all about you.
It has nothing to do with your chosen group-affiliation or preferred gender pronouns.

Wait, are you Penn Gillette?  If so, I apologize for offending you personally by disagreeing with you quoting yourself.

[Moloch]

I see... you only trust ancient out-of-date sociopaths from the stone-age?

Hippies from the 1960s looked ridiculous and acted even worse.
...
I disagreed with a statement on its own merit, don't make it all about you.

Are you calling Penn Jillette a hippie? Because he was alive during the 60's?

Could you be any more ignorant of the man?

Did you know that Penn Jillette has never so much as had a sip of alcohol in his life?

Why bother twisting his words around if you wont even listen to him say them?  You are really twisting my interpretation of his words, as it was not a direct quote... that's just silly

[BARR_Official]

Did you know that Penn Jillette has never so much as had a sip of alcohol in his life?

If you believe that on faith, I won't criticize you for it. 
Everyone needs something to believe in.

Muslims and Mormons don't drink either,
but Penn has probably achieved other feats of pious self-sacrifice as well,
in addition to manifesting holy miracles.

I think I saw him turn a potato into air.



But I should point out that he has had as many sips of alcohol as he wanted to.

[Moloch]

Did you know that Penn Jillette has never so much as had a sip of alcohol in his life?

Muslims and Mormons don't drink either,

Wrong, I have seen plenty of Mormons drink... I've had a beer with a few myself... smoked some weed with a few too...

Many Mormons have no problem breaking their rules (just like Christians)... they just don't want another Mormon to see them doing it... that's why they always stare at the door while in the bar...

There was a joke in Idaho, "When you go fishing with a Mormon, how do you keep him from drinking all your beer?"... ... "Bring a second Mormon"

Penn Jillette is legit... prove he lied or stop with all the bullshit slander... is that what Christianity is about to you?  Refuse to watch the video, but talk shit about it anyway?


Penn Jillette has performed exactly as many miracles as Jesus... and that number is zero

[BARR_Official]

Penn Jillette is legit... prove he lied

I never said he lied.  I said you believe him on faith.

But you're the one making a claim, so the burden is on you to prove it.
What you're asking is impossible:  to prove that someone's drinking doesn't exist.

You say you don't believe that Mormons abstain;  I just believe in one teetotaller fewer than you believe in.

or stop with all the bullshit slander

Could you please quote one thing I've said that could in any way be interpreted as slander?

You posted a single quote, and I presented a logical refutation of that statement.  
Now you're freaking out because someone doesn't agree with everything you say.
Stop trying to force your morality and worldview on everyone else.

[BADecker]

Penn Jillette is legit... prove he lied

I never said he lied.  I said you believe him on faith.

But you're the one making a claim, so the burden is on you to prove it.
What you're asking is impossible:  to prove that someone's drinking doesn't exist.

You say you don't believe that Mormons abstain;  I just believe in one teetotaller fewer than you believe in.

or stop with all the bullshit slander

Could you please quote one thing I've said that could in any way be interpreted as slander?

You posted a single quote, and I presented a logical refutation of that statement.  
Now you're freaking out because someone doesn't agree with everything you say.
Stop trying to force your morality and worldview on everyone else.

Don't take it so defensively. Both Moloch and organofcorti are a couple of deceptive, political science trolls, who blabber on just to cover up the posts of people who make sense.

[yugo23]

Why not hear it from the man himself?

Because I don't need some man to tell me what's right and what's wrong.

Especially not some ancient out-of-date sociopath from the 1960s, with a ponytail but without a conscience.

If his teachings are so good and true, why do people have such vastly different interpretations of the meaning?

According to his own words, the only difference between himself and a murderer is a mere difference in taste or personal preference.  He likes blue, murderers happen to like red instead.  He does whatever he wants to do, and so do murderers.  He's admitting that he lives by the same rules that murderers live by.

Murderers just have wrong thoughts, but he is pure and perfect.
That's why he's never murdered anyone - because he doesn't want to.
What if he did want to kill someone?
His solution for immoral behavior seems to be "never have any immoral desires". 
Since he can't back that up logically, you'll have to abbreviate it to "anything you want to do is good."

And for some reason you actually still follow and preach these long-abandoned ideas -
ideas that were only popular with narcissists and spoiled white kids 50 years ago in the tie-dye age,
with the highest concentration seen among homeless STD-ridden drug addicts.
Their ambition in life was to avoid work and avoid soap,
but some of them are still on TV being worshiped.  Sad.

Meh...

Considering your words and your "reasoning" (notice the "") I'd say you would mean someone to teach you one or two things yeah xD

[BARR_Official]

Don't take it so defensively. Both Moloch and organofcorti are a couple of deceptive, political science trolls, who blabber on just to cover up the posts of people who make sense.

It's a common tactic.

[Moloch]

Meh...

Considering your words and your "reasoning" (notice the "") I'd say you would mean someone to teach you one or two things yeah xD

What a shame...

With all the time he took to write a full essay response about why he refuses to so much as listen to what Penn Jillette has to say... he could have watched that 90 second video... 5-10 times...

[anon_giraffe]

I always refer to Penn Jillette who says, "As an Atheist, I have raped and murdered exactly the number of people that I want to rape and murder... that number is zero"

You're saying it's okay to murder as many people as you want.

As long as that number is zero.

No, that's not what he said.

He said the only reason he's never murdered anyone is because he's never felt like it.

The number is currently zero, but it could change to any number based on the same principles.

Actions are determined by personal desires, if someone has a desire that is over-ruled by another desire, they are still doing as they desire (or like). Jillette is a fool in some respects (just like everyone, the difference is that Jillette is a very public persona and is not shy to present his opinions in a forceful and illogical way), but he is saying that he is solely in command of his own actions.
It is common for any person to have conflicting wants/desires, that persons behaviour can reveals the dominating want/desire.

It's the same as if a Christian did murder someone, their desire over ruled any other desires which would have prevented the murder.

God gave free will that a person is solely in command of their actions, Jillette claims he has free will and is solely in command of his own actions. That also suggests that anyone who believes in free-will also is "admitting that he lives by the same rules that murderers live by."

But what are these "rules that murderers live by"? Is there such a thing beyond the philosophic veiwpoint of free will?

According to his own words, the only difference between himself and a murderer is a mere difference in taste or personal preference.  He likes blue, murderers happen to like red instead.  He does whatever he wants to do, and so do murderers.  He's admitting that he lives by the same rules that murderers live by.


Murderers just have wrong thoughts, but he is pure and perfect.
That's why he's never murdered anyone - because he doesn't want to.
What if he did want to kill someone?
His solution for immoral behavior seems to be "never have any immoral desires".  
Since he can't back that up logically, you'll have to abbreviate it to "anything you want to do is good."

This needs further investigation. You make unsupportable claims.
"anything you want to do is good" is not a self evident conclusion.

Your claim "never have any immoral desires" seems logical, because that follows from a lack of immoral behaviour (murder) is congruent with "I have raped and murdered exactly the number of people that I want to rape and murder"

However the claim that any personal morality is good does not seem relatable but seems contradictory.

For anyone to make such a claim (as Jillette seems to) it follows that "rape and murder" are immoral.
But if your claim were true, then it would be irrelevant for him to claim a lack of immorality as your claim suggests he would then accept immoral behaviour as good.

Your claim has some validity with some philosophic viewpoints.
Burden of proof falls on your court that Jillette is sympathetic to "anything you want to do is good".

[anon_giraffe]

Penn Jillette is legit... prove he lied

I never said he lied.  I said you believe him on faith.

But you're the one making a claim, so the burden is on you to prove it.
What you're asking is impossible:  to prove that someone's drinking doesn't exist.

It is easily possible to prove something that does not exist.
I have no elephants in my house. Or I am not drinking alcohol.

But Molochs claim of non-drinking is theoretically possible to prove, but seems impossible to prove without time travel and 24/7 surveillance.

[organofcorti]

Penn Jillette is legit... prove he lied

I never said he lied.  I said you believe him on faith.

But you're the one making a claim, so the burden is on you to prove it.
What you're asking is impossible:  to prove that someone's drinking doesn't exist.

It is easily possible to prove something that does not exist.

I have no elephants in my house. Or I am not drinking alcohol.

Only true in the trivial cases where something is provable, but not true for all cases. Do you have invisible microscopic elephants that run from you when you attempt to investigate them? Have you drunk alcohol that tastes and smells like like water and does not get you drunk and that someone has been putting in your water pipes?

This is an illustration of why the burden of proof regarding the existence of god is with those who claim a god or gods to exist.